Piccadilly line to Ealing Broadway

[bluegoblin7]

Aldgate itself could easily be got rid of, Aldgate East well able to compensate, but, as you say, it's Tower Hill to Liverpool Street and beyond that requires serving. also stations like Temple and Blackfriars to Liverpool Street specifically, the bus services on that corridor now being so sparse, partly as a result of the chronic road traffic.

But it's not that simple, because if you abolish the Circle line you have to replace those trains (6tph off peak) along both the south side of the Circle and the west side. Those trains are very much required all day long.

Likewise, if you close Aldgate where do you terminate the Mets? Moorgate is very disruptive, and you're stopping short of Liverpool Street which is a significant destination in itself.

Whilst I expect we will see service patterns change once 4LM is completely rolled out, there are reasons why the existing services are broadly unchanged for the best part of fifty years.

 

[VT 390]

Ealing Common problem would be easily solved by lowering the platforms and non-stopping the District Line.

This would not be a popular decision as Ealing Common passengers would only have a 10 minute service off peak and journeys from Ealing Broadway to stations towards Uxbridge would have a longer journey by going to Acton Town also the District trains on the Ealing Branch can be quite quiet so missing the Common stop would make them quieter especially after Crossrail when Passengers towards Central London may switch.

If the system desperately needs more Wimbledon services the simplest thing to do would be to abolish the Circle Line, it's not that much of a trial to change trains at Earls Court.[/QUOTE]

Not a good idea because earls court is already quite busy and all the passengers from stations such as South Kensington going to Paddington on the Circle will have to change and this service is usually busy. Also what services would serve the Line from Tower Hill to Aldgate? another section well used passengers would have to Change at Monument for the Overcrowded Northern Line or Continue to Aldgate East which would mean a Longer Journey

 

[si404]

One could 'abolish' the Circle line and send more trains to Earls Court simply by removing the curve from Gloucester Road to High Street Ken. Except Earls Court is the bottleneck and its doubtful you can send more trains via it!

 

[si404]

Though that is the main reason for converting the Ealing branch to the Piccadilly it also would provide somewhere for the proposed extra Piccadilly line trains to go as there is no extra trains required to Rayner's Lane (especially off peak)

Given that at peak times, 12tph run to Rayners Lane (most continuing on), I doubt more off-peak trains to Rayners (3tph terminating, 3tph on) would be a problem. And, as others have said, Acton Town and Northfields exist and can soak up spare capacity that can't go to Rayners or Heathrow.

And, if Piccadilly to Ealing happens at the phase 1 point of the upgrades, then there won't be enough trains coming from/going to Zone 1 to keep existing service levels west of Acton Town without reversals at Acton Town. It's a drain on limited capacity in that case, rather than a soak of excess.

The reason is to free up 6tph on the District line, allowing an increase on the busy Richmond and Wimbledon branches. And operational reasons (reduced track sharing, ability to alter tracks at stations to give level boarding)

 

[VT 390]

One could 'abolish' the Circle line and send more trains to Earls Court simply by removing the curve from Gloucester Road to High Street Ken. Except Earls Court is the bottleneck and its doubtful you can send more trains via it!

But if you removed the curve then all the passengers who would have used it would change at Earls Court, and Earls Court is already a very crowded station in terms of the amount of people using it not just the number of trains you can get through it.

 

[si404]

But if you removed the curve then all the passengers who would have used it would change at Earls Court, and Earls Court is already a very crowded station in terms of the amount of people using it not just the number of trains you can get through it.

Well yes - as well as the station not being able to take more trains, it can't take more passengers.

 

[ijmad]

LOL, I regret causing this thread to descend in to District Line crayonista territory with my ill-thought out suggestions. However, interested to figure out what the service patterns in West London would look like after this move...

Current services:

Piccadilly:

• 24tph peak to Acton Town, even split 12/12 to Heathrow and Rayners Lane (most continue to Uxbridge)
• 21tph off peak to Acton Town, split 15tph to Heathrow (3tph terminating and Northfields and 6/6 to T4/T5), and 6tph to Rayners Lane (half continue Uxbridge)

District:

• 13tph peak to Turnham Green, 7tph to Richmond and 6tph to Ealing Broadway
• 15tph peak to Wimbledon, comprised of 6tph Wimbleware and 9tph East

District Line post resignalling:

• 16tph to West London, split evenly 8/8 to Richmond and Ealing Broadway
• 16tph to Wimbledon, comprised of 8tph Wimbleware and 8tph East

So let's withdraw the District Line's Ealing Broadway service (8tph) and send +4tph to Richmond and +4tph to Wimbledon. Good news for passengers on both of these branches. The District Line in West London overall goes from 13tph (today) to 12tph (under this plan) in West London vs the 16tph it might get if services were equally split post-resignalling.

This decrease of 1 peak train only affects Ravenscourt Park and Stamford Brook because everywhere else is also served by the upgraded Piccadilly Line, and they're not hugely congested stations.

The Piccadilly Line post resignalling:

• 36tph through its core
• At least 12tph to Heathrow as today
• At least 12tph to Rayners Lane as today

So possibilities:

• Send 8tph to Ealing Broadway, leaving +2 for Heathrow and Rayners Lane?
• Send 6tph to Ealing Broadway, leaving +3 for Heathrow and Rayners Lane?

Note that Ealing Broadway may get extra Elizabeth Line services by this era, in particular 2tph extra to Heathrow T5, so maybe not such a huge blow to lose 2tph to West London. TfL do not predict very much crush loading in this area in 2040:

So would that be the plan? It might work, but it doesn't leave much potential for future growth in these areas.

 

[Mojo]

• 24tph peak to Acton Town, even split 12/12 to Heathrow and Rayners Lane (most continue to Uxbridge)

• 21tph off peak to Acton Town, split 9tph to Heathrow (3tph terminating and Northfields), and 6tph to Rayners Lane (half continue Uxbridge)

That isn't quite the current service pattern and it isn't so easy to say, because it depends on the exact hour at peak times and the direction you are travelling.

Broadly speaking, the daytime (offpeak) service pattern is 12tph to Heathrow, 6tph to T5 and 6tph to T4; and 6tph to Rayners Lane with 3tph continuing to Uxbridge. There are also 3tph terminating at Northfields.

 

[ijmad]

That isn't quite the current service pattern and it isn't so easy to say, because it depends on the exact hour at peak times and the direction you are travelling.

Broadly speaking, the daytime (offpeak) service pattern is 12tph to Heathrow, 6tph to T5 and 6tph to T4; and 6tph to Rayners Lane with 3tph continuing to Uxbridge. There are also 3tph terminating at Northfields.

Sorry yes, that was just a typo on my part. 9tph to Heathrow should be 15tph, which is more or less the same as your description (appreciate it's more nuanced in practice).

 

[rebmcr]

But it's not that simple, because if you abolish the Circle line you have to replace those trains (6tph off peak) along both the south side of the Circle and the west side. Those trains are very much required all day long.

Likewise, if you close Aldgate where do you terminate the Mets? Moorgate is very disruptive, and you're stopping short of Liverpool Street which is a significant destination in itself.

Whilst I expect we will see service patterns change once 4LM is completely rolled out, there are reasons why the existing services are broadly unchanged for the best part of fifty years.

My pet idea for a 4LM shakeup is to extend all of the Edgware Road terminators to terminate at Aldgate, which becomes exclusively the new Hammersmith & Circle line terminus — a.k.a. the "Spiral line", with all trains' service pattern being Hammersmith-KXSP-Tower Hill-Victoria-High Street Kensington-KXSP-Aldgate (and reverse).

At the same time, Metropolitans which don't terminate at Baker Street are extended to Barking, using SDO where necessary east of Liverpool Street (some platforms are long enough for S8 anyway).

The only real losers in such a scenario are for journeys starting/ending between Goldhawk Road and Edgware Road, to/from the eastern District line — greatly offset by the big crowding reduction for eastbound trains along the north Circle in the evening peak — where more than 50% of trains are S8s carting fresh air to Aldgate, before a crush-loaded H&C arrives. Plus, Bayswater etc get their direct KXSP services back.

 

[ijmad]

My pet idea for a 4LM shakeup is to extend all of the Edgware Road terminators to terminate at Aldgate, which becomes exclusively the new Hammersmith & Circle line terminus — a.k.a. the "Spiral line", with all trains' service pattern being Hammersmith-KXSP-Tower Hill-Victoria-High Street Kensington-KXSP-Aldgate (and reverse).

At the same time, Metropolitans which don't terminate at Baker Street are extended to Barking, using SDO where necessary east of Liverpool Street (some platforms are long enough for S8 anyway).

The only real losers in such a scenario are for journeys starting/ending between Goldhawk Road and Edgware Road, to/from the eastern District line — greatly offset by the big crowding reduction for eastbound trains along the north Circle in the evening peak — where more than 50% of trains are S8s carting fresh air to Aldgate, before a crush-loaded H&C arrives. Plus, Bayswater etc get their direct KXSP services back.

How would you fit 16tph from Hammersmith via Paddington, 16tph of Edgware Road terminators, and 16tph of Metropolitan Line, all down a pair of single tracks between Baker Street and Liverpool Street? The new signalling is designed for 32tph, might manage 36tph, but not 48tph, certainly not both ways over two flat junctions.

The reason trains terminate at Edgware Road is to create gaps to fit in Met services, they can't all continue on over the Northern part of the Circle. Nor can you just reduce services coming in to Zone 1 arbitrarily as many of these are crush loaded during the peaks.

 

[rebmcr]

How would you fit 16tph from Hammersmith via Paddington, 16tph of Edgware Road terminators, and 16tph of Metropolitan Line, all down a pair of single tracks between Baker Street and Liverpool Street? The new signalling is designed for 32tph, might manage 36tph, but not 48tph, certainly not both ways over two flat junctions.

The reason trains terminate at Edgware Road is to create gaps to fit in Met services, they can't all continue on over the Northern part of the Circle. Nor can you just reduce services coming in to Zone 1 arbitrarily as many of these are crush loaded during the peaks.

You're right, I'd never noticed that before. I had just assumed that "swapping" routes like-for-like would avoid both duplication and gaps.

I suppose the necessary tweak is to only extend as many services from Edgware Road to Aldgate as necessary to compensate for the loss of the Hammersmith & City line. That also makes it possible to continue terminating some Metropolitans at Aldgate — which might be necessary to fit any Barking extensions in among the existing District services.

 

[ijmad]

You're right, I'd never noticed that before. I had just assumed that "swapping" routes like-for-like would avoid both duplication and gaps.

I suppose the necessary tweak is to only extend as many services from Edgware Road to Aldgate as necessary to compensate for the loss of the Hammersmith & City line. That also makes it possible to continue terminating some Metropolitans at Aldgate — which might be necessary to fit any Barking extensions in among the existing District services.

The post-resignalling peak service proposition probably looks like this (courtesy London Reconnections):

A of my observations on this:

• The target is to run 32tph both ways over most parts of the SSR in Zone 1.
• With full computerised control signalling over the entire network, I guess flat junctions are just about possible at this frequency.
• Stations with two middle platforms are all turning 16tph (Edgware Road, Aldgate and Barking). May actually be able to turn more, but you can't get any more than 32tph in to a station over one line so I'd guess that's the limiting factor.

If you want to send some Mets to Barking, I'd guess 8tph of of Hammersmiths would be withdrawn. You could terminate them at Edgware Road, but this means the Wimbleware might have to be terminated at High Street Kensington because there's only a single line in to Edgware Road and it's already at 32tph.

You could send this 8tph to Aldgate in place of the Met, but what of the other 8tph of Mets that go round the top though? You could leave them going to Aldgate, but this seems a bit confusing. You can't send them to Barking without withdrawing 8tph of District Line. Suppose these could be terminated at Tower Hill. Might work I guess, and does deliver a fairer split out to Barking between the North and South side of the Circle, but it seems likely there aren't enough S8's vs S7's. Could run S7's on the Met, but who wants that...

 

[Busaholic]

But it's not that simple, because if you abolish the Circle line you have to replace those trains (6tph off peak) along both the south side of the Circle and the west side. Those trains are very much required all day long.

Likewise, if you close Aldgate where do you terminate the Mets? Moorgate is very disruptive, and you're stopping short of Liverpool Street which is a significant destination in itself.

Whilst I expect we will see service patterns change once 4LM is completely rolled out, there are reasons why the existing services are broadly unchanged for the best part of fifty years.

But it's not that simple, because if you abolish the Circle line you have to replace those trains (6tph off peak) along both the south side of the Circle and the west side. Those trains are very much required all day long.

Likewise, if you close Aldgate where do you terminate the Mets? Moorgate is very disruptive, and you're stopping short of Liverpool Street which is a significant destination in itself.

Whilst I expect we will see service patterns change once 4LM is completely rolled out, there are reasons why the existing services are broadly unchanged for the best part of fifty years.

Aldgate could be kept for Met terminators, but possibly not for public access, though I can see that turfing everyone out at Liverpool Street takes time.

 

[ijmad]

But it's not that simple, because if you abolish the Circle line you have to replace those trains (6tph off peak) along both the south side of the Circle and the west side. Those trains are very much required all day long.

Likewise, if you close Aldgate where do you terminate the Mets? Moorgate is very disruptive, and you're stopping short of Liverpool Street which is a significant destination in itself.

Whilst I expect we will see service patterns change once 4LM is completely rolled out, there are reasons why the existing services are broadly unchanged for the best part of fifty years.

I had a crayonista idea for a Circle-free service plan. The lynchpin is running trains from the Wimbledon branch around the eastern side of the Circle before they head out to the Met mainline.

Peak services would look like this:

• Hammersmith & City Line: 16tph from Hammersmith to Barking
• Metropolitan Line: 16tph from Baker Street to Aldgate, then proceeding around the Circle through Tower Hill and Victoria to Earls Court, then to Wimbledon.
• District Line: 8tph Richmond + 8tph Ealing Broadway to Upminster, 4tph Richmond + 4tph Ealing Broadway to Edgware Road
• Wimbleware Line: 8tph from Wimbledon to Edgware Road

This gives 32tph around the North/East/South of the Circle and 16tph around the West which is the same aspiration as 4LM, but crucially it gives for 24tph to Wimbledon and Turnham Green (50% more than now) with a nice City-City-Edgware repeating pattern. Nearly all current journeys are possible except for going from South Kensington to High Street Kensington which needs a change at Earls Court.

It may not be practical to have such a long route from the Met to Wimbledon, but you could split this service at Aldgate by tweaking the trackwork so trains approaching from the South can reverse in P2&3, while trains from the North reverse in P1&4, making it two lines, passengers could continue their journeys in most cases by walking across an island platform. This also means you can run 8 carriages around the top and 7 carriages around the bottom (I don't think the platforms are long enough for S8's to Wimbledon).

Of course this all depends on getting 48tph through Earls Court, which might just be possible with the new crossovers and signalling, but I just don't know.

 

[philthetube]

My pet idea for a 4LM shakeup is to extend all of the Edgware Road terminators to terminate at Aldgate, which becomes exclusively the new Hammersmith & Circle line terminus — a.k.a. the "Spiral line", with all trains' service pattern being Hammersmith-KXSP-Tower Hill-Victoria-High Street Kensington-KXSP-Aldgate (and reverse).

At the same time, Metropolitans which don't terminate at Baker Street are extended to Barking, using SDO where necessary east of Liverpool Street (some platforms are long enough for S8 anyway).

You would need to reduce met services elsewhere to provide enough stock.

 

[MarlowDonkey]

LOL,

This decrease of 1 peak train only affects Ravenscourt Park and Stamford Brook because everywhere else is also served by the upgraded Piccadilly Line, and they're not hugely congested stations.

Chiswick Park is a problem as well. It's after Turnham Green so not served by Richmond trains and it only has platforms on the outer lines currently used exclusively by the District. You might end up having to divert Piccadilly services to Ealing onto the "slow" lines.

 

[ijmad]

Chiswick Park is a problem as well. It's after Turnham Green so not served by Richmond trains and it only has platforms on the outer lines currently used exclusively by the District. You might end up having to divert Piccadilly services to Ealing onto the "slow" lines.

Not really a problem if the Piccadilly Line is the only thing west of Turnham Green, it can run on the outer tracks and call at Chiswick Park, plenty of space for a crossover after Richmond trains have diverged, surely? Perhaps you'd want a split so only Uxbridge/Ebdwy trains call at Chiswick Park while the express is maintained to Heathrow.

I've also seen suggestion that there's just enough space in the vicinity of Chiswick Park to build some platforms on the Richmond branch itself, which still runs very nearby the ticket hall at that point.

 

[Dstock7080]

District trains will still need access to Ealing Common depot and CBTC will not be fitted to the local lines.

 

[MatthewRead]

Not really a problem if the Piccadilly Line is the only thing west of Turnham Green, it can run on the outer tracks and call at Chiswick Park, plenty of space for a crossover after Richmond trains have diverged, surely? Perhaps you'd want a split so only Uxbridge/Ebdwy trains call at Chiswick Park while the express is maintained to Heathrow.

I've also seen suggestion that there's just enough space in the vicinity of Chiswick Park to build some platforms on the Richmond branch itself, which still runs very nearby the ticket hall at that point.

I've read that but I have previously suggested replacing the bays with narrow island platforms similar to the ones at Barons Court.

 

[simple simon]

For Richmond I would prefer to see an increase in Overground trains, I think that there will be a need for this once Old Oak Common starts to become a destination. The ability to interchange with Crossrail (Elizabeth line) will offer a better and almost certainly faster way to Central and east London than the District line. It would also help here if all Crossrail trains travelled as far as Old Oak Common rather than some terminating at Paddington.

Wimbledon is harder, as increasing train numbers will require more trains to travel though the congested Earls Court area and for reasons perhaps not relevant to this thread the loss of the bridge over the SWR in the Putney area means that it is no longer for a full service of London-bound SWR trains to be routed this way.

I thought that the District's resignalling was always meant to see an increase in train numbers through Earls Court station. Perhaps if fewer trains used this station as a timing point and staff changeover point then they would spend less time in the station - and this would effectively increase capacity at this busy junction station.

I would like to see more trains on the route through Bayswater, if Edgware Road cannot cope with more trains terminating here then maybe some could reverse at Paddington, which is a major passenger destination. To avoid delays whilst the train drivers change ends might need 'stepping back' of train drivers. These extra trains could travel to Wimbledon.

 

[simple simon]

Sending Uxbridge trains to Barking is an old idea. I think it actually happened in the late 1930's, maybe it was the war which prevented this from still being the situation. It used to be that all stations from Whitechapel eastwards were suitable for longer trains than today - there were even some morning peak hour 10 carriage trains which travelled as far as Whitechapel and then split in to 2x five car trains. However changes at Whitechapel and Barking might mean that S8's could not use these stations. btw, instead of serving Barking or terminating at Whitechapel, in times past the Met's trains ran though to New Cross (or New Cross Gate) - which obviously is not feasible any more.

It might please some safety bods if S7's terminated at Aldgate instead of S8's. Because of their shorter length it might also reduce the time it takes for the trains to 'arrive' here, as shorter trains spend less time passing through junctions. The loss of the bay at Liverpool St is also a shame - it was far more useful to more passengers (especially those who wanted Liverpool St Stn!) than Moorgate.

 

[swt_passenger]

There’s no suggestion that the number of trains through Earls Court would increase beyond the post SSR resignalling “end state”, which is 32 tph through Earls Court total. The published statement simply says that the Ealing Broadway trains will be used to augment the Richmond and Wimbledon service.

Taking another point, through running of all Crossrail trains to at least Old Oak Common is planned, it’s why the GW reliefs side of the HS2 station western throat layout has been altered to include central turnback sidings.

(By the way, wasn’t all this about Picc to Ealing Broadway discussed only a week or two ago in a separate thread? Can’t seem to find it though...)

 

[ijmad]

(By the way, wasn’t all this about Picc to Ealing Broadway discussed only a week or two ago in a separate thread? Can’t seem to find it though...)

I blame myself for this one coming off the rails, if a Mod wants to try and split it up they should!

 

[swt_passenger]

I blame myself for this one coming off the rails, if a Mod wants to try and split it up they should!

No, I think this is definitely the right thread for Ealing Bwy Picc, I think the recent chat was off at a tangent to something else.

Found it, in this thread where you’d never expect it:
https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...transport-strategy.161342/page-2#post-3762201

 

[adrock1976]

For Richmond I would prefer to see an increase in Overground trains, I think that there will be a need for this once Old Oak Common starts to become a destination. The ability to interchange with Crossrail (Elizabeth line) will offer a better and almost certainly faster way to Central and east London than the District line. It would also help here if all Crossrail trains travelled as far as Old Oak Common rather than some terminating at Paddington.

Wimbledon is harder, as increasing train numbers will require more trains to travel though the congested Earls Court area and for reasons perhaps not relevant to this thread the loss of the bridge over the SWR in the Putney area means that it is no longer for a full service of London-bound SWR trains to be routed this way.

I thought that the District's resignalling was always meant to see an increase in train numbers through Earls Court station. Perhaps if fewer trains used this station as a timing point and staff changeover point then they would spend less time in the station - and this would effectively increase capacity at this busy junction station.

I would like to see more trains on the route through Bayswater, if Edgware Road cannot cope with more trains terminating here then maybe some could reverse at Paddington, which is a major passenger destination. To avoid delays whilst the train drivers change ends might need 'stepping back' of train drivers. These extra trains could travel to Wimbledon.

Regarding Wimbledon, do the London Underground drivers have to "plunge" for a signal just before departing?

 

[Dstock7080]

Regarding Wimbledon, do the London Underground drivers have to "plunge" for a signal just before departing?

Yes, at both Wimbledon and Richmond ‘train ready to depart’ plungers must be operated.

 

[VT 390]

Nearly all current journeys are possible except for going from South Kensington to High Street Kensington which needs a change at Earls Court.

I really think any plan should keep trains on this section because more passengers changing at earls court would make an already busy station busier and the Circle service on this section is well used and usually quite busy, also providing the only direct service from Victoria to Paddington which is very useful.

 

[si404]

I really think any plan should keep trains on this section because more passengers changing at earls court would make an already busy station busier and the Circle service on this section is well used and usually quite busy, also providing the only direct service from Victoria to Paddington which is very useful.

And, given the limit of 32tph through Earls Court, without them the south side of the Circle wouldn't have enough trains (and probably the west side too).